TEVAR for acute uncomplicated aortic dissection: immediate repair versus medical therapy

Editor's Choice - Optimal Timing of Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair for Uncomplicated Type B Aortic Dissection: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVE

Type B aortic dissections (TBAD) have a high mortality rate and are challenging to both classify and manage. There is significant evidence supporting the use of early intervention in complicated TBAD with thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). Currently, there is equipoise regarding the optimal timing for TEVAR in TBAD. This systematic review answers whether early TEVAR in the hyperacute or acute phase of the disease has improved aorta related events in the one year follow up period with no change in mortality rate when compared with TEVAR in the subacute or chronic phase.

DATA SOURCES

A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses literature search guidelines for MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Reviews until 12 April 2021. Inclusion and exclusion criteria targeting the review objective and high quality research were employed by separate authors.

REVIEW METHODS

These studies were then reviewed for suitability, risk of bias, and heterogeneity using the ROBINS-I tool. Results were extracted for the meta-analysis with RevMan using odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals with I2 used to assess heterogeneity.

RESULTS

Twenty articles were included. A meta-analysis showed no significant difference between acute phase TEVAR (excluding the hyperacute phase) and subacute or chronic phase TEVAR for the all cause 30 day and one year mortality rates. Aorta related events in the 30 day post-operative period were unaffected by the timing of intervention but had significant improvement in aorta related events in the one year follow up favouring TEVAR in the acute phase compared with subacute or chronic phase. Risk of confounding was high but with low heterogeneity.

CONCLUSION

Without prospective randomised controlled studies, it is evident that there is improved aortic remodelling in long term follow up with intervention in the acute setting from three to 14 days after symptom onset. This suggests that TEVAR in the acute period of TBAD is both safe and beneficial, and can be considered for early stent grafting based on clinical, anatomical and patient factors.

Readmission after early thoracic endovascular aortic repair versus medical management of acute type B aortic dissection

BACKGROUND

The use of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) for the management of acute uncomplicated type B aortic dissection (TBAD) has increased. Although the results from early studies were promising, larger randomized trials evaluating TEVAR are lacking. It is also unclear where sufficient equipoise exists for such trials. In the present study, we evaluated the number of readmissions and unplanned operations after TEVAR vs those after medical management as the initial treatment of acute uncomplicated TBAD and the frequency of each treatment in this population.

METHODS

We performed a multi-institutional retrospective review of patients with acute TBAD from 2015 to 2020 with the 1-year outcomes available, excluding patients with prior aortic intervention or chronic, iatrogenic or traumatic etiologies. The primary exposure was TEVAR vs medical management at the index admission. The patient demographics, clinical presentation, and imaging findings were analyzed using bivariate and multivariate logistic regression for the primary outcomes of unplanned readmission and/or operation after the initial admission. The secondary outcomes were mortality, myocardial infarction, stroke, renal failure requiring dialysis, retrograde type A dissection, and length of stay. We hypothesized that the readmissions would be higher with medical management.

RESULTS

A total of 216 patients with TBAD (47 with complicated and 169 with uncomplicated) from two large academic centers were identified. Of the 169 patients with uncomplicated TBAD, 83 (49%) had been treated medically and 86 (51%) had undergone TEVAR at the initial admission. No differences were found in the demographics or high-risk imaging features at presentation. The medically managed patients had had higher rates of unplanned readmission (34% vs 9%; P = .0001) and operation (28% vs 8%; P = .0007) but shorter lengths of stay (6.3 vs 13.1 days; P < .0001). No differences were found in mortality, although the rate of myocardial infarction was higher in the medically managed group (10.8% vs 2.3%; P = .02). Although 28% of the medically managed patients had later required operation, they had had morbidity and mortality similar to those of patients who had undergone initial TEVAR. Initial medical management was associated with unplanned readmission (odds ratio, 8.3; P = .02) and the need for operation (odds ratio, 4.56; P = .006). No differences were found in the outcomes according to the involved aortic zones.

CONCLUSIONS

In the present study, medical management of acute uncomplicated TBAD was associated with higher rates of readmission and the need for unplanned operation compared with TEVAR. However, no differences were found in the 1-year mortality for the patients for whom medical management had failed. Because one half of the patients had undergone medical management and one half had undergone early TEVAR, this finding suggests clinical equipoise for the treatment of acute uncomplicated TBAD. Therefore, a larger randomized trial appears warranted to determine whether a clear benefit exists for early TEVAR.

Impact of TEVAR timing on outcomes after uncomplicated Type B Aortic Dissection in the SVS VQI Post-approval Project for Dissection

OBJECTIVE

The timing of TEVAR after the onset of uncomplicated acute type B aortic dissection (UATBAD) remains controversial. The objective of this study was to evaluate the SVS VQI post-approval study (VQI PAS) data for the impact of TEVAR timing for UATBAD on early and late outcomes, including mortality, procedural complications and long-term reintervention.

METHODS

The VQI PAS utilized for this analysis includes a total of 606 patients. Patients with UATBAD (defined as those without rupture or malperfusion) exclusive of cases categorized as emergent (N=206), were divided into groups defined by the SVS/STS reporting guidelines based on timing of treatment after the onset of dissection: within 24 hours (N=8), 1-14 days (N=121), and 15-90 days (N=77). Univariate and multivariable analysis was used to determine differences between timing groups for postoperative mortality, in-hospital complications, and reintervention.

RESULTS

Demographics and comorbid conditions were very similar across the 3 TEVAR timing groups. Notable differences included a higher prevalence of baseline elevated creatinine (>1.8mg/dL)/chronic ESRD and designation as "urgent" in the <24-hour group, as well as a higher rate of pre-operative beta-blocker therapy in the 1-14 day group. Post-operative stroke, CHF, and renal ischemia were more common in the <24-hour group, without an increase in mortality. Unadjusted 30-day mortality across groups was lowest in the early TEVAR group (0%, 3.3%, 5.2% P=0.68), as was 1-year mortality (0%, 8.3%, 18.2%; P=0.06), although not statistically different at any time point. Reintervention out to three years was not different between the groups. Multivariable analysis demonstrated the need for a postoperative therapeutic lumbar drain to be the only a predictive risk factor for mortality (HR=7.595, 95% CI 1.730-33.337, P=0.007). When further subdivided into patients treated 1-7 days or 8-14 days after dissection, findings were similar.

CONCLUSIONS

UATBAD patients treated within 24 hours were unusual (N=8), too small for valid statistical comparison, and likely represent a high-risk subgroup, which is manifested in a higher risk of complications. Although there was a trend towards improved survival in the acute (1-14 day phase), outcomes did not differ compared to the subacute (15-90 days) phase with relation to early mortality, post-operative complications or one-year survival. These data suggest that proper selection of patients for early TEVAR can result in equivalent survival and early outcomes.

Endovascular Repair of the Thoracic Aorta Combined with Drug Therapy in Acute Uncomplicated Type B Aortic Dissection

Objective

This study was to evaluate the clinical efficacy of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) combined with Best Medical Therapy (BMT) in acute uncomplicated type B aortic dissection (TBAD).

Methods

Using the random method, 90 patients admitted to our hospital between January 2018 and January 2020 with acute uncomplicated TBAD were randomly divided into a control group and a study group, with 45 cases in each of the groups. The effectiveness of BMT combined with TEVAR treatment was compared.

Results

The incidence of recent adverse reactions did not differ significantly between the two groups. Compared to the control group, the 1-year survival rate and 2-year survival rate of patients in the study group were considerably higher. In order to examine the relationship between survival and time, the Kaplan-Meier curve was used. Both groups reached the median survival time after 24 months of follow-up. The expected survival time of the study group was longer than that of the control group. False lumen thrombosis or absence of thrombus was significantly more prevalent in the study group than in the control group.

Conclusion

For patients with acute uncomplicated TBAD, BMT combined with TEVAR can significantly improve the long-term survival rate and increase the expected survival time.

The impact of dissection membrane motility on mid-term aortic remodelling after thoracic endovascular repair

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to assess preoperative dissection flap motility and to evaluate its impact on the aortic remodelling and the development of distal stent-induced new entry after thoracic endovascular aneurysm repair (TEVAR)/frozen elephant trunk (FET).

METHODS

Patients with primary or residual type B dissections were included in a retrospective study with transoesophageal echocardiography analysis of the preoperative dissection flap motility assessed by the true lumen (TL) strain. Three-dimensional computing tomography centreline reconstructions before TEVAR/FET and during the follow-up were conducted to measure aortic remodelling: false lumen thrombosis, TL expansion and aortic diameters at 10 and 20 cm downstream the left subclavian artery, at the coeliac trunk and in the infrarenal aorta. All continuous variables are reported as median with first and third quartiles.

RESULTS

Fifty-six consecutive patients were treated with TEVAR (n = 45) or FET (n = 11) in the acute (n = 16), subacute (n = 16) and chronic (n = 24) dissection phase. At a median follow-up of 6 (3-12) months, they showed a favourable TL expansion in the descending aorta, significantly higher in the acute [+9 mm (5-12); P < 0.001] and subacute groups [+5 mm (3-8); P = 0.039] than in the chronic group [+2 mm (0-5)]. The dissection flap motility parameter TL strain was superior in the acute (P = 0.006) and subacute (P = 0.035) groups in comparison to the chronic group. The motile flap [TL strain >22.5% (median)] was associated with a higher TL expansion rate in the thoracic aorta (P = 0.009) and a comparable distal stent-induced new entry incidence (overall: 16%) in comparison to the immobile flap (P = 0.89).

CONCLUSIONS

The intraoperative assessment and the inclusion of the dissection flap motility parameters in the decision-making during TEVAR/FET may refine the distal endograft sizing for an improved remodelling of the TL.

Using Machine Learning to Predict Five-Year Reintervention Risk in Type B Aortic Dissection Patients After Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair

Purpose: Type B aortic dissection (TBAD) is a high-risk disease, commonly treated with thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). However, for the long-term follow-up, it is associated with a high 5-year reintervention rate for patients after TEVAR. There is no accurate definition of prognostic risk factors for TBAD in medical guidelines, and there is no scientific judgment standard for patients’ quality of life or survival outcome in the next five years in clinical practice. A large amount of medical data features makes prognostic analysis difficult. However, machine learning (ML) permits lots of objective data features to be considered for clinical risk stratification and patient management. We aimed to predict the 5-year prognosis in TBAD after TEVAR by Ml, based on baseline, stent characteristics and computed tomography angiography (CTA) imaging data, and provided a certain degree of scientific basis for prognostic risk score and stratification in medical guidelines. Materials and Methods: Dataset we recorded was obtained from 172 TBAD patients undergoing TEVAR. Totally 40 features were recorded, including 14 baseline, 5 stent characteristics and 21 CTA imaging data. Information gain (IG) was used to select features highly associated with adverse outcome. Then, the Gradient Boost classifier was trained using grid search and stratified 5-fold cross-validation, and Its predictive performance was evaluated by the area under the curve (AUC) in the receiver operating characteristic (ROC). Results: Totally 60 patients underwent reintervention during follow-up. Combing 24 features selected by IG, ML model predicted prognosis well in TBAD after TEVAR, with an AUC of 0.816 and a 95% confidence interval of 0.797 to 0.837. Reintervention rate of prediction was slightly higher than the actual (48.2% vs. 34.8%). Conclusion: Machine learning, which combined with baseline, stent characteristics and CTA imaging data for personalized risk computations, effectively predicted reintervention risk in TBAD patients after TEVAR in 5-year follow-up. The model could be used to efficiently assist the clinical management of TBAD patients and prompt high-risk factors.

Timing of thoracic endovascular aortic repair for uncomplicated acute type B aortic dissection and the association with complications

OBJECTIVE

Previous publications have clearly established a correlation between timing of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) and complications after treatment of complicated acute type B aortic dissection (ATBAD). However, the temporal association of TEVAR with morbidity after uncomplicated presentations is poorly understood and has not previously been examined using real-world national data. Therefore, the objective of this analysis was to determine whether TEVAR timing of uncomplicated ATBAD (UATBAD) is associated with postoperative complications.

METHODS

The Vascular Quality Initiative TEVAR and complex endovascular aneurysm repair registry was analyzed from 2010 to 2019. Procedures performed for non-dissection-related disease as well as for ATBAD with malperfusion or rupture were excluded. Because of inherent differences between timing cohorts, propensity score matching was performed to ensure like comparisons. Univariate and multivariable analysis after matching was used to determine differences between timing groups (symptom onset to TEVAR: acute, 1-14 days; subacute, 15-90 days) for postoperative mortality, in-hospital complications, and reintervention.

RESULTS

A total of 688 cases meeting inclusion criteria were identified. After matching 187 patients in each of the 1- to 14-day and 15- to 90-day treatment groups, there were no statistically significant differences between groups. On univariate analysis, the 1- to 14-day treatment group had a higher proportion of cases requiring reintervention within 30 days (15.3%) compared with UATBAD patients undergoing TEVAR within 15 to 90 days (5.2%; P = .02). There was also a difference (P = .007) at 1 year, with 33.8% of the 1- to 14-day UATBAD patients undergoing reintervention compared with 14.5% for the 15- to 90-day group. There were no statistically significant differences on multivariable analysis for long-term survival, complications, or long-term reintervention. There was a trend toward significance (P = .08) with the 1- to 14-day group having 2.3 times the odds of requiring an in-hospital reintervention compared with the 15- to 90-day group.

CONCLUSIONS

Timing of TEVAR for UATBAD does not appear to predict mortality or postoperative complications. However, there is a strong association between repair within 1 to 14 days and higher risk of reintervention. This may in part be related to the 1- to 14-day group's representing an inherently higher anatomic or physiologic risk population that cannot be entirely accounted for with propensity analysis. The role of optimal timing to intervention should be incorporated into future study design of TEVAR trials for UATBAD.

Fluid-structure interaction simulations of patient-specific aortic dissection

Credible computational fluid dynamic (CFD) simulations of aortic dissection are challenging, because the defining parallel flow channels-the true and the false lumen-are separated from each other by a more or less mobile dissection membrane, which is made up of a delaminated portion of the elastic aortic wall. We present a comprehensive numerical framework for CFD simulations of aortic dissection, which captures the complex interplay between physiologic deformation, flow, pressures, and time-averaged wall shear stress (TAWSS) in a patient-specific model. Our numerical model includes (1) two-way fluid-structure interaction (FSI) to describe the dynamic deformation of the vessel wall and dissection flap; (2) prestress and (3) external tissue support of the structural domain to avoid unphysiologic dilation of the aortic wall and stretching of the dissection flap; (4) tethering of the aorta by intercostal and lumbar arteries to restrict translatory motion of the aorta; and a (5) independently defined elastic modulus for the dissection flap and the outer vessel wall to account for their different material properties. The patient-specific aortic geometry is derived from computed tomography angiography (CTA). Three-dimensional phase contrast magnetic resonance imaging (4D flow MRI) and the patient's blood pressure are used to inform physiologically realistic, patient-specific boundary conditions. Our simulations closely capture the cyclical deformation of the dissection membrane, with flow simulations in good agreement with 4D flow MRI. We demonstrate that decreasing flap stiffness from [Formula: see text] to [Formula: see text] kPa (a) increases the displacement of the dissection flap from 1.4 to 13.4 mm, (b) decreases the surface area of TAWSS by a factor of 2.3, (c) decreases the mean pressure difference between true lumen and false lumen by a factor of 0.63, and (d) decreases the true lumen flow rate by up to 20% in the abdominal aorta. We conclude that the mobility of the dissection flap substantially influences local hemodynamics and therefore needs to be accounted for in patient-specific simulations of aortic dissection. Further research to accurately measure flap stiffness and its local variations could help advance future CFD applications.

High intimal flap mobility assessed by intravascular ultrasound is associated with better short-term results after TEVAR in chronic aortic dissection

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) in chronic aortic dissection remains controversial. We analysed whether a high intimal flap mobility (IFM) of the dissection membrane has an impact on aortic remodelling after TEVAR in chronic Type B aortic dissection. Patients undergoing TEVAR with intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) were analysed and IFM was calculated. High IFM was defined as maximum flap amplitude >3 mm. For determining aortic remodelling, the degree of true lumen (TL) expansion was analysed in the last available follow-up CT. Fifty-two patients (63.6 ± 15.4 years) with a mean follow-up of 26.6 ± 20.7 months were analysed. The mobile flap group (n = 29) showed higher absolute TL expansion at the distal stent-graft (5.9 ± 3.1 vs. 3.3 ± 5.4 mm; p = 0.036) and a higher increase in TL diameter (18 ± 10 vs. 9 ± 15%; p = 0.017) compared to the non-mobile group (n = 23). Basic TEVAR-related outcome characteristics were comparable, but the mobile intimal flap group showed a lower re-intervention rate (3 vs. 8pts.; p = 0.032) in chronic dissections. High IFM in chronic Type B aortic dissection is linked to improved aortic remodelling and is associated with a lower re-intervention rate over time. IVUS assessment of IFM in chronic Type B aortic dissection might be helpful in identifying patients with better remodelling after TEVAR.

Outcomes of Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair for Acute Type B Dissection in Patients With Intractable Pain or Refractory Hypertension

PURPOSE

To compare uncomplicated acute type B aortic dissection (UATBAD) patients with intractable pain/refractory hypertension treated with thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) to UATBAD subjects without these features receiving best medical therapy (BMT).

METHODS

Interrogation of the hospital database identified 101 consecutive UATBAD patients admitted between January 2011 and December 2014. Of these, 74 patients (mean age 62±13 years; 44 men) were treated with BMT; the other 27 UATBAD patients (mean age 63±13 years; 17 men) were subsequently treated with TEVAR for intractable pain (24, 89%) and/or refractory hypertension (3, 11%) at a mean 2.4±3.3 days (median 1, range 0-12) after admission. Mixed models were employed to determine differences in centerline measured aortic remodeling. Propensity analysis was employed to mitigate selection bias. Kaplan-Meier methodology was used to estimate reintervention and survival.

RESULTS

The groups were well matched; there was no difference in demographics, comorbidities, or proportion with visceral involvement (70% for TEVAR vs 86% for BMT, p=0.08). There was no significant difference in length of stay (9.6±6.3 for TEVAR vs 10.3±7.8 for BMT, p=0.3), complications (19% for TEVAR vs 24% for BMT, p=0.6), or 30-day mortality (0 for TEVAR vs 7% for BMT, p=0.1). One (4%) TEVAR patient experienced retrograde dissection. BMT resulted in greater mean increase in discharge antihypertensive medications (1.7±1.9 vs 0.7±1.7 for TEVAR, p=0.03), but there was no difference in narcotic utilization. Mean follow-up was greater in the TEVAR group (17.9±16.0 months) compared with BMT patients (11.5±10.8 months, p=0.05). TEVAR significantly improved rates of aortic diameter change (1.5% vs 12.9% for BMT, p=0.007), complete false lumen thrombosis (41% vs 11% for BMT, p=0.004), and true lumen expansion (85% vs 7% for BMT, p<0.01). However, there was no difference in reintervention (25.9% for TEVAR vs 23% for BMT, p=0.2) or survival (log-rank p=0.8).

CONCLUSION

TEVAR for UATBAD with intractable pain/refractory hypertension is safe but offers no short-term outcome advantage when compared to UATBAD patients without these features receiving BMT. A significant improvement in aortic remodeling was identified after TEVAR. The potential long-term reintervention and aorta-related mortality benefits of this favorable remodeling have yet to be defined and randomized trials are warranted.

Hybrid Endovascular Aortic Arch Reconstruction for Acute Aortic Dissection: An Endovascular Bridge Technique for Complex Anatomy

Acute type A aortic dissections starting at the arch pose a challenge for cardiac surgeons. Open surgical repair requires deep hypothermic circulatory arrest for arch reconstruction and is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Hybrid aortic repair techniques, with open arch debranching and thoracic endovascular aortic repair, have been employed in high-risk cases and challenging aortic pathology. Herein, we present a case of a 33-year-old African American male with a history of open thoracoabdominal aortic reconstruction and femoral-femoral artery bypass for a type B dissection who subsequently presented with new-onset chest pain and was found to have a retrograde type A dissection of a bovine arch with multiple dissection flaps and possible contrast extravasation on chest computed tomography. Endovascular reconstruction of the aortic arch using a hybrid technique was utilized and proved to be feasible and further should be considered when complex anatomy limits traditional surgical options.

Dissecção aórtica de tipo B de Stanford: relato de caso e revisão de literatura

O complexo tratamento de dissecção da aorta ainda apresenta controvérsias devido à gravidade do caso e à necessidade de individualização da terapêutica. A gravidade relaciona-se ao difícil diagnóstico pelas queixas inespecíficas e pelas graves complicações inerentes à evolução da doença (ruptura aórtica, síndrome de má perfusão, dissecção retrógrada, dor ou hipertensão refratária). Este relato apresenta um homem de 61 anos, tabagista e hipertenso mal controlado, que evoluiu para dissecção aórtica de tipo B de Stanford. Foi abordado através de técnica endovascular com uso de endoprótese com stent para tratamento do caso após falha do tratamento medicamentoso. O tratamento endovascular mostrou-se uma ferramenta eficaz para o tratamento definitivo, com boa taxa de sobrevida ao final do primeiro ano após o procedimento.

Volumetric analysis of the initial index computed tomography scan can predict the natural history of acute uncomplicated type B dissections

OBJECTIVE

Our objective was to characterize the predictive impact of computed tomography (CT) scan volumetric analysis on the natural history of acute uncomplicated type B aortic dissections (ADs).

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective review of patients with acute type B ADs from 2009 to 2014. On an iNtuition workstation (TeraRecon, Foster City, Calif), volume measurements were obtained using the true lumen volume (TLV), false lumen volume (FLV), and total aortic volume from the left subclavian artery to the celiac artery. Growth rate was calculated as the change in maximal diameter between first and last available CT scans during the time interval. The primary outcome of the study was delayed aortic intervention. P < .05 was considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

During a 5-year period, 164 patients had CT scan evidence of acute type B ADs; 11 patients were excluded for lack of subsequent follow-up imaging; 36 patients who underwent urgent repair (<14 days from presentation) were also excluded. We evaluated a total of 117 patients: 85 patients who did not require intervention and 32 who underwent delayed (>14 days) thoracic endovascular aneurysm repair (29) or open repair (3). Mean age was 66 ± 12 years. Mean TLV/FLV ratio on initial CT scan was significantly higher in patients who did not eventually require an operation (1.55 vs 0.82; P = .02). The mean growth rate was higher in those eventually requiring operation (2.47 vs 0.42 mm/mo; P = .003). Patients were divided into three subgroups on the basis of their initial imaging TLV/FLV ratios (<0.8, 0.8-1.6, and >1.6). There was a significant difference in the growth rates between these three groups (4.6 vs 2.4 vs 0.8 mm/mo; P < .025). Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve analysis revealed that a TLV/FLV ratio <0.8 was highly predictive for requiring an intervention (area = 0.8; sensitivity, 69%; specificity, 84%: positive predictive value, 71%; negative predictive value, 81%), with an odds ratio of 12.2 (confidence interval, 5-26; P < .001). Conversely, a TLV/FLV ratio of >1.6 was highly predictive for freedom from delayed operation (sensitivity, 91%; specificity, 42%; positive predictive value, 61%; negative predictive value, 86%). After Kaplan-Meier analysis, 1-year and 2-year survival free of aortic interventions was 60% and 42% with a TLV/FLV ratio <0.8 and 92% and 82% with a ratio >1.6 (P = .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Initial CT scan volumetric analysis in patients presenting with uncomplicated acute type B ADs is a useful tool to predict growth and need for future intervention.

Endovascular repair of aortic dissection and intramural hematoma: indications and serial changes

Thoracic aortic dissection (AD) is one of the most common aortic emergencies. It can be fatal if not promptly diagnosed and treated. Intramural hematoma (IMH) of the aorta is recognized as distinct from classic (double-barreled) AD. IMH also frequently leads to aortic emergency, which can be fatal unless rapidly diagnosed and treated. Recently, thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) has been used for the treatment of complications caused by AD. TEVAR is also a viable option for the treatment of complicated IHM. In this article, we review the details of TEVAR as treatment options for AD and IMH, including the indications for TEVAR, imaging, and follow-up.

Nationwide Comparative Impact of Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair of Acute Uncomplicated Type B Aortic Dissections

Objective:

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) for acute uncomplicated type B aortic dissection (TBAD) remains controversial. This study aims to evaluate the impact of TEVAR on mortality, morbidity, length of stay (LOS), and discharge status in patients with acute uncomplicated TBAD.

Methods:

We analyzed the National Inpatient Sample from 2009 and 2010. Patients were categorized according to the type of treatment: TEVAR or medical management. Outcomes, including mortality, stroke, myocardial infarction (MI), acute renal failure, discharge disposition, and LOS, were compared between the treatment groups.

Results:

We identified 4706 patients with TBAD. Mean age was 67 years and 55% were male. Treatment options included TEVAR in 504 and medical management in 4202. The overall adjusted in-hospital mortality was similar for both the groups (8.5% for TEVAR vs 10.3% for medical management, P = .224). The TEVAR carried higher risk of stroke (odds ratio [OR] = 1.61, 95% confidence interval [CI] = [1.14-2.27]; P = .0073). The TEVAR was associated with prolonged LOS (12 vs 5.6 days, P < .0001) and patients were less likely to be discharged home (OR 0.73, 95% CI 0.54-0.99; P = .013). When stratified by age, all outcomes were similar between the 2 groups, with the exception of longer LOS with TEVAR.

Conclusions:

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair for acute uncomplicated TBAD was associated with similar in-hospital mortality, MI, and renal failure as compared to medical management. The TEVAR had higher rate of stroke up to the age 70 years and longer LOS. Because extending TEVAR to less complicated patients could only decrease TEVAR mortality rates, these findings support the more widespread use of TEVAR to treat patients with uncomplicated TBAD.

Endovascular management of acute aortic syndromes

The term "acute aortic syndrome" (AAS) refers to a spectrum of life-threatening thoracic aortic pathologies including intramural hematoma, penetrating atherosclerotic ulcer, and aortic dissection. Clinically, patients often present with characteristic aortic pain. AAS often leads to aortic rupture. Therefore, recognition of this condition, its prompt diagnosis, and timely treatment is crucial to obtain clinical success and improved overall survival. The management of AAS, however, remains a therapeutic challenge. Endovascular strategies have gained wide acceptance and now represent a minimally invasive alternative to traditional open surgery. Several studies have shown endovascular repair of varying thoracic aortic pathologies to be technically feasible with fewer complications than open surgery. In this review, the authors discuss AAS pathology and its management, with particular attention to the current role of endovascular aortic repair and its treatment.

Propensity score-matched analysis of open surgical and endovascular repair for type B aortic dissection

Objective. To identify national outcomes of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) for type B aortic dissections (TBADs). Methods. The Nationwide Inpatient Sample database was examined from 2005 to 2008 using ICD-9 codes to identify patients with TBAD who underwent TEVAR or open surgical repair. We constructed separate propensity models for emergently and electively admitted patients and calculated mortality and complication rates for propensity score-matched cohorts of TEVAR and open repair patients. Results. In-hospital mortality was significantly higher following open repair than TEVAR (17.5% versus 10.8%, P = .045) in emergently admitted TBAD. There was no in-hospital mortality difference between open repair and TEVAR (5.6% versus 3.3%, P = .464) for elective admissions. Hospitals performing thirty or more TEVAR procedures annually had lower mortality for emergent TBAD than hospitals with fewer than thirty procedures. Conclusions. TEVAR produces better in-hospital outcomes in emergent TBAD than open repair, but further longitudinal analysis is required.

Management of acute complicated and uncomplicated type B dissection of the aorta: focus on endovascular stent grafting

Endovascular repair of aortic dissection is the subject of multiple studies. This article aims to review the current literature on Type B complicated and uncomplicated dissection, including indications for medical therapy, open surgical therapy, and endovascular therapy. The review suggests a benefit for thoracic endovascular aortic repair in complicated dissection and medical therapy for uncomplicated dissection. Upcoming trials may shed more light on this issue.

Thoracic EndoVascular Stent Graft Repair for Aortic Aneurysm

BACKGROUND

The number of cases employing thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) has been increasing due to lower morbidity and mortality compared to open repair technique. The aim of this study is to evaluate the outcome of TEVAR for thoracic aortic diseases.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Sixteen patients underwent TEVAR from October 2003 to April 2010. Mean age at operation was 59 years (20~78 years), and 11 were male. Indications for TEVAR were large aortic diameter (>5.5 cm) upon presentation in 6 patients, increasing aortic diameter during the follow-up period in 4, traumatic aortic rupture in 3, persistent chest pain in 2, and ruptured aortic aneurysm in one. The mean diameter, length and the number of the stents were 33 mm (26~40 mm), 12 cm (9.5~16.0 cm), and 1.25 (1~2), respectively. Aortography employing Multi-detector computerized tomography (MDCT) technique was performed at one week, and patients were followed up in the out-patient department at one month, 6 months, and one year postoperatively.

RESULTS

Primary technical success showing complete exclusion of the aneurysm was achieved in 15 patients. One patient showed a small endo-leak (type 1). Four patients developed perioperative stroke: Three recovered without sequelae, and one showed mild right-side weakness. There was no operative mortality. Diameter of the thoracic aorta covered by stent graft changed within 10% range in 12 patients, decreased by more than 10% in 3, and increased by more than 10% in one during mean follow-up duration of 18 months (1~73 months). There was no recurrence-related death during this period.

CONCLUSION

Intermediate-term outcome after TEVAR was encouraging. Indications for TEVAR could be extended for other thoracic aortic diseases.

Acute complicated and uncomplicated type III aortic dissection: an endovascular perspective

Type III aortic dissection is associated with high morbidity and mortality. There is a shifting paradigm in the treatment of complicated and uncomplicated acute type III aortic dissection toward earlier endovascular repair. In this review, the authors present the current perspective on the endovascular management of acute complicated and uncomplicated type III aortic dissection.